Messages in this thread | | | From | Stephen Warren <> | Date | Wed, 11 Jan 2012 14:58:32 -0800 | Subject | RE: [RFC PATCH v3 2/5] pinctrl: add dt binding support for pinmux mappings |
| |
Shawn Guo wrote at Wednesday, January 11, 2012 4:01 PM: > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:41:56AM -0800, Stephen Warren wrote: > > Shawn Guo wrote at Tuesday, January 10, 2012 6:05 AM: > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 08:21:05AM +0000, Dong Aisheng-B29396 wrote: > > > > Here what I wonder is that do we need to allow the platform to use a func-name > > > > property in their pinmux func node or pinmux group node to specify the name. > > > > > > I do not see the necessity. > > > > > > > If it is allowed, then it could be flexible for soc to define their names. > > > > If not there may be limitations on their node names since we can only get it from > > > > the node name. > > > > > > To me, the node name is perfectly fine to be used for that purpose. > > > > I'd prefer if we could use integers over strings if at all possible, but > > that does have a dependency on dtc getting a syntax to define named > > constants, or the kernel pre-processing the .dts files before passing > > them to dtc. > > > > But if we have to use strings, I will point out that the pin names I > > chose for Tegra may not be suitable as DT node names; I don't /think/ > > the DT node names can contain spaces, but I chose to name the Tegra > > pinctrl pins after both their pin name and GPIO name so that it's > > easier to correlate the two: > > > > PINCTRL_PIN(TEGRA_PIN_SDIO3_CLK_PA6, "SDIO3_CLK PA6"), > > > > Now, I could change that, but I'd prefer not to. > > Hmm, we are talking about function name and pingroup name instead of > individual pin name. In your pinctrl-tegra20.c, they are .name and > .groups as below.
OK, I guess that's true; my function and group names are just [a-z0-9].
> #define FUNCTION(fname) \ > { \ > .name = #fname, \ > .groups = fname##_groups, \ > .ngroups = ARRAY_SIZE(fname##_groups), \ > }
-- nvpublic
| |